325 replies to this topic

[Alan Davion]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 05:03 PM, said:

So judgemental.

Honestly man, given the way some people are totally losing their shite over a couple poorly chosen sentences, can you really blame him?

I mean Jesus, I'm judging these people as well because, from the way they're flying off the handle at not being able to customize their mechs to the Nth degree, it really makes me think that some of these people would look like fatass mouth breathing CoD kiddies trying to figure out how to make a stock mech work.

And against AI for that matter.

It's honestly like they can't, or dare I say WON'T play a game unless they can have some undeniable advantage over their opponents.

[Lord0fHats]

Alan Davion, on 17 September 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

Honestly man, given the way some people are totally losing their shite over a couple poorly chosen sentences, can you really blame him?

Yes? None of the people he's responding too the past few pages are "losing their shite." They're given fully worded responses and explaining why they feel that way, which is a fair bit more sophisticated than what he's been throwing out. This is a discussion board for discussing things but because he doesn't like the topic he's being incredibly condescending. If he doesn't like the topic he doesn't have to participate. Instead he's calling people hypocrites, angsty, and bragging about putting people on ignore.

It's pretty toxic behavior, which reaches the level of forum troll when he starts declaring his "reservation of judgement" while most of his posts have been nothing by highly judgemental dismissals of others over what is ultimately a pretty tiny and insignificant point of disagreement.

Quote

It's honestly like they can't, or dare I say WON'T play a game unless they can have some undeniable advantage over their opponents.

Some people enjoy maximizing their play advantage and part of the game is figuring out its roots and deciding which choices are most optimal to achieve the best results. It's a game and there will always be people who want the "high score." Sometimes they choose to be {Richard Cameron} to people who aren't like that but I haven't seen much of that in here. I've been called a "pissy snowflake" "angsty" (that one confuses me) and compared to an arsonist oddly enough simply for expressing the opinion that I like high levels of customization in a franchise that is known for it. Franchises change of course. They inevitably do, but the response to people disappointed in the prospect of lost customization in this thread is incredibly juvenile.

Some people like the idea, some don't but so far only a certain set of people who do have been needlessly demeaning to others.

[MischiefSC]

If it's got customization like MWO (which is any more than any prior MW title) it's just MWO with bots. I wouldn't get it.

To each their own.

Sounds like PGI is using customization limits to handle balance in SP and purpose to logistics and salvage.

Some people won't get it cuz SP only. Some won't get it unless it's got a story bases linear campaign.

Saying "nobody will buy it without X" and "they should do X so more people get it" are not really valid because different people will get or not get something for different reasons.

It's also crazy to say PGI is changing customization because they're hardcore lore hounds. Go play some FW and get back to me on that. They're doing it to match the options they have on game design. We know they have more artists than coders - building hundreds of variants is likely more viable than building a mech lab from scratch and figuring out how to balance the game in SP around liquid metal mechs to give the economy and logistics any purpose.

And keep in mind it is all pretty much from scratch. If toy think they're just copying the hacked together bastardized out of date Cryengine code into the new Unreal engine you're high.

[JC Daxion]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 05:24 PM, said:

Some people enjoy maximizing their play advantage and part of the game is figuring out its roots and deciding which choices are most optimal to achieve the best results. It's a game and there will always be people who want the "high score." Sometimes they choose to be {Richard Cameron} to people who aren't like that but I haven't seen much of that in here. I've been called a "pissy snowflake" "angsty" (that one confuses me) and compared to an arsonist oddly enough simply for expressing the opinion that I like high levels of customization in a franchise that is known for it. Franchises change of course. They inevitably do, but the response to people disappointed in the prospect of lost customization in this thread is incredibly juvenile.

Some people like the idea, some don't but so far only a certain set of people who do have been needlessly demeaning to others.

So then use the 300-400 mech variants and min/max,.. How is that not part of the game?

Edited by JC Daxion, 17 September 2017 - 05:45 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Side note,

The sexy Velma pic now beats all Morgan Freeman memes on "He's right you know".

[The6thMessenger]

MischiefSC, on 17 September 2017 - 05:46 PM, said:

The sexy Velma pic now beats all Morgan Freeman memes on "He's right you know".

True, i liked the sexy velma better.

But he's still right you know.

[Lord0fHats]

[mod]

Redacted

[/mod]

Quote

So then use the 300-400 mech variants and min/max,.. How is that not part of the game?

Because it's not about the ability to min/max for me. I like customizing. I like playing in the mech lab. Hearing the plan is for less of that isn't what I'd want as a potential player.

I bring that point up because people who like it keep dismissing people who don't as "just wanting an undeniable advantage" and making all kinds of meta comparisons that are equally valid with or without customization.

Edited by poopenshire, 18 September 2017 - 05:35 AM.

[JC Daxion]

MischiefSC, on 17 September 2017 - 05:41 PM, said:

It's also crazy to say PGI is changing customization because they're hardcore lore hounds. Go play some FW and get back to me on that. They're doing it to match the options they have on game design. We know they have more artists than coders - building hundreds of variants is likely more viable than building a mech lab from scratch and figuring out how to balance the game in SP around liquid metal mechs to give the economy and logistics any purpose.

I totally disagree with you on the last part.. It's not because they have more artists.. It's all about balance and giving the game depth at economy.

Just look at this game, you don't have 300 mechs because you need 300 mechs especially with the customization. In an SP game, half the fun will be collecting the mechs, and getting unique builds and such, and then combining them with others.

Maybe your mech is missing an auto cannon when you get it, but the next mission has one you COULD salvage if you play your cards right. That will add tension to the match, maybe it is a strong mech and your beat up.. You could just take out that RT and most likely loose the weapon.. Or you could try to leg it, strip it, and CT core from behind. If all you had to do was goto some mech lab, and buy the AC that could just wreck tons of tension, and strats from the game. Like mech commander 1.. Did you blow up that mad cat in mission 3 using the fuel tanks, or did you try to beat him after a long batle with 3 mechs, probably a raven, firestarter and a commando, or a salvaged Uler if you were lucky enough to grab one?

This could add to the same thing.. Ohh boy, check it out a thunder bolt with MPLs! I've been waiting all game for that bad boy, now lets see about taking it down so i can salvage it! Or maybe its a purely mech salesman that comes rolling through one mission and has what you are looking for, but you need to sell your favorite mech or mechs, just to have enough to grab it.

Yes part of that has nothing to do with customization, but another part does and i think the biggest parts are economy and balance.. which in an SP game like this are two huge parts.

[RussianWolf]

Antares102, on 17 September 2017 - 07:31 AM, said:

self-absorbed and egoistic

Sounds about right from the developer that I've seen.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 03:40 PM, said:

Then you realize not ever mech comes stock with some super heavy weapon taking up most of their weapon weight and many have just damn weird load outs. Take a Thunderbolt 5S; LRM 15, Large Laser, 3 MLs, and 2 Machine Guns. That build is all over the place.

From a lore perspective actually it's not.

It's a medium range brawler, with some long range indirect fire ability. It's intention is to fire the LRM 15 and Large Laser at range to soften up targets, while it get's in range to utilize it's mlas and large laser, the machine guns are anti-infantry protection.

But paired with a light that can screen off other lights, and a medium or two that can back things up, maybe another heavy or assault for additional punch, that machine is a valued member of the lance.

You are, again, thinking too much from a "single mech" perspective, and not a "this mech functions in a lance of 3 other mechs, that each help make up for deficiencies of the others."

Edited by CMDR Sunset Shimmer, 17 September 2017 - 06:12 PM.

[oldradagast]

At this point, it's not worth reasoning with the "no customization - ever!' crowd. They are so emotionally invested in screwing over people who like MWO and "proving how superior they are" with some crap stock build that they can't see straight.

I clearly posted in both threads on this topic that all I want to see is LOGICAL, IN-THEME customization - swapping out a heatsink for 1 more ton of ammo, swapping an PPC for an ERPPC, and the responses I've gotten to such simple ideas are from the pits of madness - and that's ignoring the outright trolling BS or nonsense posts. Apparently, such minor changes are "the height of power-gaming" and "sacrilege to the Battletech franchise."

It's laughable, and if PGI listens to these jokers and gives them a game with no customization, I hope all 3 dozen of the people who buy it enjoy their little salt-filled forum where they can call each other names, brag about their meaningless skills, and complain about how "power-gamer" other players are for daring to buy a mech with double heatsinks when it finally comes onto the market.

They clearly aren't interested in a rational discussion at this point - it's just not worth the time, and hopefully PGI is smart enough to realize that while MWO customization is too far for a game like this, no customization is even stupider and just appeals to people who want to "stick it" to anyone who dared enjoy MWO.

Edited by oldradagast, 17 September 2017 - 06:07 PM.

[Lord0fHats]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 17 September 2017 - 05:59 PM, said:

You are, again, thinking too much from a "single mech" perspective

In a game where I pilot a single mech, why wouldn't I? And if I have multiple mechs why would I split my ability to soften a target at range among multiple units, when I can dedicated 1-2 mechs to the role, get the killers in range and let them finish the target while the peelers switch to another for when the first target is dead? From a single mech perspective and a multi-mech perspective this distribution of weapon systems makes little sense. Just because it's lore justified doesn't suddenly make it make sense, which is why I called the lore excuse "shoddy." You can see this in real military configurations. Versatility is built into the unit as a whole, not specific elements of it. Specific elements are specialized, with limited versatility defined by their expected role.

A more proper specialized, but still flexible 5S would dumb the missile launcher, upgrade to heavier lasers, but keep the machine guns cause of those sneaksie hobbi- I mean infantry. Sneaksie infantry

The only context in which that distribution of weapons makes sense is in a workhorse mech garrisoning a location with no other/few other mechs and that is intended to operate alone with minimal support. That scenario necessitates such a varied load out to deal with a range of situations, which is somewhat fair lore wise because in the lore large concentrations of mechs are limited to major engagements, but a game representing that reality would be rather dull as an FPS imo. Who is playing a Battletech themed game to fight mechs only occasionally?

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

oldradagast, on 17 September 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

At this point, it's not worth reasoning with the "no customization - ever!' crowd. They are so emotionally invested in screwing over people who like MWO and "proving how superior they are" with some crap stock build that they can't see straight.

I clearly posted in both threads on this topic that all I want to see is LOGICAL, IN-THEME customization - swapping out a heatsink for 1 more ton of ammo, swapping an PPC for an ERPPC, and the responses I've gotten to such simple ideas are from the pits of madness - and that's ignoring the outright trolling BS or nonsense posts. Apparently, such minor changes are "the height of power-gaming" and "sacrilege to the Battletech franchise."

It's laughable, and if PGI listens to these jokers and gives them a game with no customization, I hope all 3 dozen of the people who buy it enjoy their little salt-filled forum where they can call each other names, brag about their meaningless skills, and complain about how "power-gamer" other players are for daring to buy a mech with double heatsinks when it finally comes onto the market.

They clearly aren't interested in a rational discussion at this point - it's just not worth the time, and hopefully PGI is smart enough to realize that while MWO customization is too far for a game like this, no customization is even stupider and just appeals to people who want to "stick it" to anyone who dared enjoy MWO.

And I've mentioned, at least 3 times now, that THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE GETTING.

[mod]

Redacted

[/mod]

Edited by poopenshire, 18 September 2017 - 05:37 AM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 06:12 PM, said:

In a game where I pilot a single mech, why wouldn't I? And if I have multiple mechs why would I split my ability to soften a target at range among multiple units, when I can dedicated 1-2 mechs to the role, get the killers in range and let them finish the target while the peelers switch to another for when the first target is dead? From a single mech perspective and a multi-mech perspective this distribution of weapon systems makes little sense. Just because it's lore justified doesn't suddenly make it make sense, which is why I called the lore excuse "shoddy." You can see this in real military configurations. Versatility is built into the unit as a whole, not specific elements of it. Specific elements are specialized, with limited versatility defined by their expected role.

A more proper specialized, but still flexible 5S would dumb the missile launcher, upgrade to heavier lasers, but keep the machine guns cause of those sneaksie hobbi- I mean infantry. Sneaksie infantry

The only context in which that distribution of weapons makes sense is in a workhorse mech garrisoning a location with no other/few other mechs and that is intended to operate alone with minimal support. That scenario necessitates such a varied load out to deal with a range of situations, which is somewhat fair lore wise because in the lore large concentrations of mechs are limited to major engagements, but a game representing that reality would be rather dull as an FPS imo. Who is playing a Battletech themed game to fight mechs only occasionally?

To your first point. Yes, you pilot 1 mech, HOWEVER, there are 3 other teammates that compliment your mech. You're not forced to take that mech, [unless it's your starter, which won't happen you'll likely be starting in a commando or something. light.]
For the second point regarding "lore can't justify it."

"Mechs often employ a mix of ammo based, and laser based weaponry, allowing them to function at a multitude of roles, and function for extended periods of time in the field when unable to re-arm their expendable munitions."

That example of yours with the thumderbolt, has an LRM 15, and a Large Laser for long range combat. That large laser, helps back it up, and allows it to function for extended periods of time away from logistical chains.

You never know, it's entirely possible, that MW5 will have you in protracted, extended conflicts where you are unable to refill your expendable munitions.. [and if that happens, it's likely, you won't be ready for it to happen.]

oh, and as for your very last bit about "who plays mechwarrior for garrison duty." *raises her hand.*

Yeah, I'd play the **** out of a merc sim that pushes you into traditional Battletech Mercernary roles.

Then again I'm the type that likes playing Space games as a cargo hauler.

Edited by CMDR Sunset Shimmer, 17 September 2017 - 06:24 PM.

[MischiefSC]

The6thMessenger, on 17 September 2017 - 05:49 PM, said:

True, i liked the sexy velma better.

But he's still right you know.

Morgan Freeman has been right ever since he streamed himself playing Day Z when it was an ARMA 2 mod and messing with people. The girl who said, as she killed and looted him with a fire axe, "I love you Morgan Freeman!" is always awesome.

However, for a meme, sexy Velma just ended this whole topic. Various egos and arguments and whatever. PGI is probably limiting mech bay somehow, people are going to cry over it but it's not changing.

Stacked Velma Dinkley looking like she's a bad girl who knows where you keep it, that's the only useful thing that will ever come out of this thread. Thread over, Velma 1, Brown Sea Community 0.

[Alan Davion]

MischiefSC, on 17 September 2017 - 06:21 PM, said:

Morgan Freeman has been right ever since he streamed himself playing Day Z when it was an ARMA 2 mod and messing with people. The girl who said, as she killed and looted him with a fire axe, "I love you Morgan Freeman!" is always awesome.

However, for a meme, sexy Velma just ended this whole topic. Various egos and arguments and whatever. PGI is probably limiting mech bay somehow, people are going to cry over it but it's not changing.

Stacked Velma Dinkley looking like she's a bad girl who knows where you keep it, that's the only useful thing that will ever come out of this thread. Thread over, Velma 1, Brown Sea Community 0.

Someone needs to make a "Velma is automatically right" meme or something similar now.

[Lord0fHats]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 17 September 2017 - 06:13 PM, said:

And I've mentioned, at least 3 times now, that THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE GETTING.

I was unaware expressions of disappointment weren't allowed here.

[mod]

Redacted

[/mod]

Quote

Yes, you pilot 1 mech, HOWEVER, there are 3 other teammates that compliment your mech.

Unless PGI is planning to break new ground in teammate AI, and for guys who claim they can't figure out the Cry Engine, I doubt that very much, I don't expect much. Granted I suddenly have an epic vision of complex squad commands with the ability to pause time, target an enemy component and command an ally to fire a specific weapon at it that would be so damn sick but I don't see PGI making that kind of stride and will only believe it when I see it.

As for my second point you actually didn't respond to it at all as much as bring up something else entirely. If the goal is for the mech to operate without resupply for a duration that LRM launcher makes even less sense and my suggested rebuild of dumping it for heavier lasers makes even more. I would actually be very averse to ammo in MW5, depending on the availability of resupply. There's a reason the PPC was my favorite weapon in MW4 Mercs. Range. Power. No ammo. The only ammo based weapons I used with SRMs, gauss rifles, and long toms for that one mission where you defend the pass and the enemy bottles up for you

I did experiment with LRMs but LRMs didn't work much better in that game than they do in MWO imo.

Edited by poopenshire, 18 September 2017 - 05:37 AM.

[JC Daxion]

oldradagast, on 17 September 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

At this point, it's not worth reasoning with the "no customization - ever!' crowd. They are so emotionally invested in screwing over people who like MWO and "proving how superior they are" with some crap stock build that they can't see straight.

Or they could be like me.. I don't care.. I just want a fun SP game/campaign, and if it has some really fun economy, collectible/salvage system then sign me up! If they think that dumping customizing mechs increases the fun of the other 2 i am perfectly ok with that.


I love MWO, I loved the old games.. I hope i love BT, and mech 5 as well.


IMO it is sounding a lot like Freedom force in some ways. If it ends up being like it, in that way you customize your group by picking a few heroes, it could be fantastic.. FF is probably one of the best action RTS's i ever played. and yes, i know Mech 5 isnt. but these days great games often take concepts from others that work great in ways you could never thought of.

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

As for my second point you actually didn't respond to it at all as much as bring up something else entirely. If the goal is for the mech to operate without resupply for a duration that LRM launcher makes even less sense and my suggested rebuild of dumping it for heavier lasers makes even more. I would actually be very averse to ammo in MW5, depending on the availability of resupply. There's a reason the PPC was my favorite weapon in MW4 Mercs. Range. Power. No ammo. The only ammo based weapons I used with SRMs, gauss rifles, and long toms for that one mission where you defend the pass and the enemy bottles up for you

How could you not get a catapult to work in mech 4? You had to of been doing it wrong.

[JediPanther]

So glad we will own our own version of the game. I'm going to spend a lot of time figuring out ue4 next year and mod my mw5 so much. None of the crap yellow-on-yellowish hug colors or **** vision modes that make it harder to see.

[Lord0fHats]

IDk. It's been a long *** time now, and I was a lot dumber then than I am now. I tried to get them to work but I just never got the results I wanted. I had better luck with LRM light mechs.